Depends. Sony has a relatively good working relationship with Marvel/Disney, and they also don't get any merchandise revenue from the Spider-man movies. If they get in financial trouble, I could potentially see Sony selling back the rights in exchange for a distribution deal, so they'd get guaranteed revenue for a couple future movies, in exchange for vastly lower cost and risk. Sure, they'd lose the big paycheck, but they already lost a big chunk of that paycheck anyway.

Not unless the wheels completely fall off the Spidey movie franchise. If Sony really wants to retain the rights I think they'll have to go the James Bond route though (recast and move forward, not reboot at the end of every contract)

When Marvel reclaims the Spidey rights....THEN Spidey will be done right. Until then we will have films like what we got recently...which were entertaining but still lacking a lot.

__________________Beliefs - Christian. Anti-Republican. Anti-Gun. Complete separation of church and state. Freedom of speech. Freedom to practice any religion in public. Less focus on foreign lands and more focus on our own problems.

The fact that Jeph Loeb and Joe Quesada have pretty limited influence on Marvel Studios allows me to have the measure of faith you lack.

That all said, MS won't be able to touch SM unless a bankrupt Sony sells the rights or Disney buys Sony outright.

Sadly we may never see Spiderman fight along side the Avengers, They had a chance to put Oscorp building in the New York Skyline during the Avengers and did not do so.

Sony is going to try to Milk Spiderman for all they can and then when it is all used up like the Raimi Movies, they will reboot him again just like Warner Brothers is doing to Superman.

You would think with the amount of money Marvel Studios is making on each film, Worldwide Boxoffice for IM3 is now north of a billion dollars, they could but together a package to Buy back Spiderman at least in time for a cameo in Avengers 2 and a New Film produced by Marvel Studios.....but it does not look likey.

a movie franchise CANNOT survive without an advertising budget, and merchandise pays for that budget.

sorry but EVEN spiderman CANNOT thrive without some sort of support.

and starting with tasm2, sony is on their own, NO merchandise money

no comics, no toys, no nothing, disney does not NEED spiderman money, they got pixar, star wars and amusement parks and the rest of the marvel universe.

and when disney gets nothing for the movies, why not kill him?

fox hasn't had xmen support since disney bought marvel, and look what happened, wolverine and first class made 16.2 million COMBINED domestically, and domestic box office is ALL that matters when it comes to sequels, and before anyone tries to say i'm wrong, please provide INDISPUTABLE PROOF by citing a legitimate example of ONE big budget movie that tanked domestically yet cleaned house overseas that got a sequel.

Sadly we may never see Spiderman fight along side the Avengers, They had a chance to put Oscorp building in the New York Skyline during the Avengers and did not do so.

Sony is going to try to Milk Spiderman for all they can and then when it is all used up like the Raimi Movies, they will reboot him again just like Warner Brothers is doing to Superman.

You would think with the amount of money Marvel Studios is making on each film, Worldwide Boxoffice for IM3 is now north of a billion dollars, they could but together a package to Buy back Spiderman at least in time for a cameo in Avengers 2 and a New Film produced by Marvel Studios.....but it does not look likey.

The only reason the Oscorp Tower didn't make it in The Avengers was because the design for it wasn't finished by the time Avengers started filming. Time was the only issue. Would it be nice to see Spider-Man in the MCU? Absolutely. In fact, the MCU feels empty without Spider-Man there. However, that can still be achieved without the rights going back (and it is not that unlikely for it to happen).

Sony is probably not going to reboot for a while. First, they wouldn't risk going through backlash again. There would be even more backlash if a reboot came out within the next 10 years than there was when the current reboot came out. Second, Sony has said that part of the reason they wanted to reboot in the first place was because they believed they grew up Peter Parker too fast in the old films and wanted to slowly develop him, much like how the comics developed him from a high school kid to a fully grown man in 50 years. It would be stupid to reboot after 3 or 4 films if you have the intention of doing that. Third, Webb and Sony have both said that they are building a massive Spider-Man universe with this franchise much like the MCU is a massive universe. Why would they do that if they are just going to discard this universe in a few years? Unless the next films are not successful, we will most likely see the current franchise keep going James Bond style much like the MCU will keep going in the same way.

Also, let's say for the sake of argument that Marvel wouldn't ruin Spider-Man in the films despite the amount of disrespect they've been giving him in every other medium they touched. Even in that case, when would they have the time to make a good quality Spider-Man film? They are way too busy with Avengers and other films. On the other hand, Sony only has to worry about Spider-Man and has far more time to focus on Spider-Man. Marvel would not have the full time to give him the film he deserves.

Would it be nice to see Spider-Man in the MCU? Yes. In fact, we both agree that it is necessary. The MCU feels empty without Spider-Man. However, that can happen without the rights going back to Marvel. And it is not that unlikely for it to happen either based on the relationship that Marvel and Sony have, which is a good one (something both Feige and the Sony CEO have said). Sony even let Marvel use a lot of Spider-Man related properties already such as the ESU shirt in the Item 47 short film and the same Oscorp logo from the movie in the Iron Man 3 game.

a movie franchise CANNOT survive without an advertising budget, and merchandise pays for that budget.

sorry but EVEN spiderman CANNOT thrive without some sort of support.

and starting with tasm2, sony is on their own, NO merchandise money

no comics, no toys, no nothing, disney does not NEED spiderman money, they got pixar, star wars and amusement parks and the rest of the marvel universe.

and when disney gets nothing for the movies, why not kill him?

fox hasn't had xmen support since disney bought marvel, and look what happened, wolverine and first class made 16.2 million COMBINED domestically, and domestic box office is ALL that matters when it comes to sequels, and before anyone tries to say i'm wrong, please provide INDISPUTABLE PROOF by citing a legitimate example of ONE big budget movie that tanked domestically yet cleaned house overseas that got a sequel.

Wow.

So basically kill Spidey and then expect Disney/Marvel to revive a character they completely wiped out and have no support for.

You literally just advocated the character's permanent death in all media.

a movie franchise CANNOT survive without an advertising budget, and merchandise pays for that budget.

sorry but EVEN spiderman CANNOT thrive without some sort of support.

and starting with tasm2, sony is on their own, NO merchandise money

no comics, no toys, no nothing, disney does not NEED spiderman money, they got pixar, star wars and amusement parks and the rest of the marvel universe.

and when disney gets nothing for the movies, why not kill him?

fox hasn't had xmen support since disney bought marvel, and look what happened, wolverine and first class made 16.2 million COMBINED domestically, and domestic box office is ALL that matters when it comes to sequels, and before anyone tries to say i'm wrong, please provide INDISPUTABLE PROOF by citing a legitimate example of ONE big budget movie that tanked domestically yet cleaned house overseas that got a sequel.

That sounds immature.

__________________

FANTASTIC FOUR"This is our chance to make a difference" - Sue Storm - The Invisible Woman"He's stronger than any of us but he's not stronger than all of us" - Reed Richards - Mr. Fantastic"We could these powers to help people" - Johnny Storm - The Human Torch"You can't fix this, nobody can" - Ben Grimm - The Thing

a movie franchise CANNOT survive without an advertising budget, and merchandise pays for that budget.

sorry but EVEN spiderman CANNOT thrive without some sort of support.

and starting with tasm2, sony is on their own, NO merchandise money

no comics, no toys, no nothing, disney does not NEED spiderman money, they got pixar, star wars and amusement parks and the rest of the marvel universe.

and when disney gets nothing for the movies, why not kill him?

fox hasn't had xmen support since disney bought marvel, and look what happened, wolverine and first class made 16.2 million COMBINED domestically, and domestic box office is ALL that matters when it comes to sequels, and before anyone tries to say i'm wrong, please provide INDISPUTABLE PROOF by citing a legitimate example of ONE big budget movie that tanked domestically yet cleaned house overseas that got a sequel.

So basically kill Spidey and then expect Disney/Marvel to revive a character they completely wiped out and have no support for.

You literally just advocated the character's permanent death in all media.

if it works, why not? its hollywood and comics after all, when sony caves, just say it was an alternate universe thing and bring him back, the ****'s been workin for years in comics, so again, why not?

if it works, why not? its hollywood and comics after all, when sony caves, just say it was an alternate universe thing and bring him back, the ****'s been workin for years in comics, so again, why not?

R.I.P. James Gandolfini

Uh, because you would be literally killing Spider-Man off completely from all media to the point that there'd be no reason to bring him back because the franchise will have no cash potential and will be dead?

If anything, all that will do is force more people to go see Sony's Spider-Man because it will literally be the only Spider-Man product around.

Uh, because you would be literally killing Spider-Man off completely from all media to the point that there'd be no reason to bring him back because the franchise will have no cash potential and will be dead?

If anything, all that will do is force more people to go see Sony's Spider-Man because it will literally be the only Spider-Man product around.

Your entire post reeks of immaturity.

check that tone junior, name calling is as immature has you can get.

characters get brought back ALL the time, so you killed your own argument, and if you bring spiderman back has part of an ensemble (avengers) than you create renewed interest which can spin off into a new series of films, sony wants to create an mcu just like disney, but when you have ONLY one big hero, that universe will get small in a hurry. spiderman NEEDS to be a part of disney mcu, especially with ZERO merchandise money.

fox hasn't had xmen support since disney bought marvel, and look what happened, wolverine and first class made 16.2 million COMBINED domestically, and

...and yet they're still making sequels to those movies, and fox still has a stranglehold on the rights.

Quote:

Originally Posted by animex

domestic box office is ALL that matters when it comes to sequels, and before anyone tries to say i'm wrong, please provide INDISPUTABLE PROOF by citing a legitimate example of ONE big budget movie that tanked domestically yet cleaned house overseas that got a sequel.

Honestly, the idea that studios only get a meaningless sliver of foreign gross is outdated. To the best of my knowledge, the actual big studios get something closer to 40% of the foreign gross in most cases these days. The 10% number is from back when studios didn't care about foreign sales, and so subcontracted it for cheap because they didn't care.

...and yet they're still making sequels to those movies, and fox still has a stranglehold on the rights.

you are right, but this is fox we are talking about, not the brightest film company out there, but probably the most arrogant, they make disney and sony look modest.

Mission: Impossible - III: $134M domestic vs $150M budget. Made $263M overseas. Got a sequel.
0
(we have a winner!!!, good research, i missed that one, but then again, Tom Cruise does help produce these movies, and HE wouldn't end HIS series on a downer)

The Expendables 2: $85M domestic vs $100M budget. Made $215M overseas. Another sequel and a possible female spinoff are in the works.

(no disputing you there, good research)

Prometheus: $126M domestic vs. $130M budget. Made $276M overseas. A sequel is in the works.

(when it actually gets made, ill admit i was wrong, but FOX again)

And there are a few movie that tanked in all markets and yet still got sequels: Ghost Rider, The Fast and The Furious: Tokyo Drift to name a couple.

(Ghost Rider did NOT lose money domestically, and it made more than its budget overseas. fftd was ONLY a sequel UNTIL fast and furious came out, and it would have been the LAST movie if they couldn't have gotten the original cast back together)